December 23, 2001

6:29 AM

Giuliani is Time's Man of the Year.For a year when the choice would have been hard before 9/11, this seemed like one of the most obvious choices. It's feel-good and he really did do a lot to rally the city. Were you expecting it? Should they have chosen Osama bin Laden or the firefighters?
posted by onthestereo (67 comments total)

Sure, Giuliani helped NY heal after a difficult period of adversity. But bin Laden changed the course of millions of lives, started a war, and destroyed a landmark of American fiscal dominance...

And apparently, he left Time editors with their tails between their legs.

Looks like the terrorists have already won to me.
posted by dogmatic at 6:35 AM on December 23, 2001

I had no idea that Time magazine was so New York-centric. I heard that Time said that Bin Laden was "too small of a man" to rate the honor. If he's shorter than Guliani, then he must be a midget.
posted by crunchland at 6:38 AM on December 23, 2001

Cowards. While Mayor Giuliani certainly was everything a leader should be, it's clear that (a) his influence was reactive, and (b) his influence outside of New York was greatly lessened, even more so outside of the US. All talk about "America's Mayor" aside (and yes, even I was impressed by his leadership, and I'm really not much of a Giuliani fan otherwise), his actions did not have the lasting impact that I would expect for the man of the year.

That said, I don't think it should have just been Osama bin Laden. If you really have to restrict it to an individual, yes, but it's more believable that Al Qaeda as a whole had the largest impact, for good or for bad, on the year.

Looks like Time really has fallen under the sway of their corporate masters.

posted by elvolio at 6:39 AM on December 23, 2001

I expected them to choose bin Laden but that's because of the criteria they usually abide by. However, in this case, Mayor Giuliani was the right choice. What kind of controversy/outrage would they have caused if they selected bin Laden? Perhaps they did not want to find out.
posted by lostbyanecho at 6:40 AM on December 23, 2001

Giuliani rose to the occasion. Hats off to him for being a guiding force when people were looking for one and needed one.

I'm not one to wax poetic on any politician but he gets my vote for being near the top in that category.
posted by Taken Outtacontext at 6:46 AM on December 23, 2001

I have to agree with lostbyanecho. They probably chose the safest decision. I don't think it should have been Osama either though, I'd rather have seen it be a group of people like the firefighters or basicly "rescue" people that helped show the world what us Americans really are and can really do, but that's my opinion. Not that Guliana doesn't deserve it though.

Time took the easiest and more cost-effective route. I can not remember who they chose years and years ago, but it destroyed the magazine sales so bad that grocery stores were throwing them away because they just could not sell them anymore. I really wish I could remember who that was and when???!!!
posted by the_0ne at 6:47 AM on December 23, 2001

I heard that Time said that Bin Laden was "too small of a man" to rate the honor. If he's shorter than Guliani, then he must be a midget.

The irony is that bin Laden is 6'5" tall.
posted by boaz at 6:48 AM on December 23, 2001

Weak.
posted by dlewis at 6:48 AM on December 23, 2001

Agreed Taken Outtacontext, not only was he a GREAT politician before 9/11, he shined even more afterwards...
posted by the_0ne at 6:48 AM on December 23, 2001

Isn't NY a place where many many people live in poverty??
what did Guliana do about that, If i was mayor i'd be ashamed.

I stopped buying TIME after i noticed it was so US centric with its polls...
Sounds like a 'bring on the sales' choice to me.
posted by Burgatron at 6:53 AM on December 23, 2001

Damn, was I even nominated?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:02 AM on December 23, 2001

mainstream media is no longer relevent.
posted by corpse at 7:04 AM on December 23, 2001

Frankly, I was sort of hoping that Time would split the difference between Osama and Giuliani and nominate Peter Pan Guy.
posted by MAYORBOB at 7:10 AM on December 23, 2001

My choice would have been the forgotten stories of 2001. (NY Times)
posted by Carol Anne at 7:11 AM on December 23, 2001

An opinion piece in today's NYTimes: "Giuliani Made New York's Mayor Matter Again"
posted by mattpfeff at 7:35 AM on December 23, 2001

Wow - I'd heard a good number of weeks ago that OBL had it, lock stock and barrel. I'm guessing, now, that I heard a hypothetical situation - but I reacted to it on my blog anyway. The People of the Year should have been the victims of the massacre.

Giuliani is, as others have noted, a safe choice. I will admit that I think he fit into the leadership role far, far, far, far, far better than George "Osama is Evil!" Bush did.
posted by hijinx at 7:52 AM on December 23, 2001

Isn't NY a place where many many people live in poverty??
what did Guliana do about that, If i was mayor i'd be ashamed.

Even though I'm not a big Giuliani fan, under his reign crime dropped in New York and seemed to become a more visitor-friendly place.
posted by owillis at 7:57 AM on December 23, 2001

And who can forget his classic SNL sketch:

“We’re going to get tough ... on graffiti,” the mayor said in one taped skit, as he strolled down a city street. “Whenever anyone writes his name on a wall, we’re going to write ‘sucks,’ underneath it ... For three- time offenders, we’ll write ‘sucks big time.”’

Still shouldn't be Person of the Year, though. I'll say it again: Time magazine, you are weak. The award is for the most newsworthy, is it not?

Searched the web for giuliani news. Results 1 - 10 of about 173,000. Search took 0.17 seconds.

Searched the web for "bin laden" news. Results 1 - 10 of about 1,430,000. Search took 0.07 seconds.
posted by dlewis at 8:12 AM on December 23, 2001

Who here reads Time? Isn't it just filler not unlike N'Sync or the boys?
posted by ( . )( . ) at 8:22 AM on December 23, 2001

What about the mayor of Crystal City, VA (Pentagon) whats his name.
posted by stbalbach at 8:25 AM on December 23, 2001

Ummm, so why was this a link to CCN instead of Time Magazine? Would you rather read a news report or the actual 'Man of the Year' article?
posted by fleener at 8:34 AM on December 23, 2001

I called it. I said a month ago my vote'd be for Rudy. "I told you so." I was right for once. Now I get to sprain my wrist patting myself on the back. Woo hoo! A month ago Rudy didn't look like the obvious answer to most, but I think it's a rare and excellent decision and I'll tell you why.

"Giuliani helped NY heal after a difficult period of adversity. But bin Laden changed the course of millions of lives, started a war, and destroyed a landmark of American fiscal dominance..."

It's simple mathematics and this is something most people just don't point out enough. On an average day, each of those buildings would have between 20-25K people in them. Accumulatively that's about 50K. Let me reiterate - first fears were that as many as FIFTY THOUSAND PEOPLE were gonna be dead in those two towers - not counting the people who died in the planes, and the people below. It actually wasn't 50K of people at that moment of impact of the first plane. It was a slow day, thank God. Still, there were many thousands of people in there, even if the buildings weren't at full capacity. At the least there were around 30K of people in both towers accumulatively. Depends on who you talk to.

Before the towers fell, the bravest and finest of New York were already mobilizing. Now, the REAL men of the year are the firefighters and policemen of New York, but it's Rudolph Giuliani who has been actively supporting, coordinating, and demanding the best from these men throughout his term of office. When working with each group he'd wear that group's hat. He'd become one of them. He was well aware of their capabilities and for his time in office he's been instrumental in insuring these guys were prepared for the worst - never in a million years dreaming that they'd actually face the worst.

They rose to the challenge and they met it. Thousands of lives were systematically escorted out of the buildings before they fell, with firefighters rushing up the stairs to help more people, as civilians went the opposite direction out of harm's way. The FYND & NYPD followed standard procedures and were confident in their training.

It's not that Bin Laden's plans killed roughly three thousand lives at last count. It's a documented fact that Rudolph Giuliani's leadership helped spare the lives of anywhere between 27-47 thousand New Yorkers. Giuliani's team of heroes saved easily ten times more lives than Bin Laden's terrorists killed. Bin Laden tried to destroy New York and America. Giuliani's efforts were instrumental in saving New York from pain and despair. His leadership has been questioned and has been wrong in the past, but when push came to shove his efforts shined through like a battering ram of light.

Now matter how much a person might hate Giuliani's past decisions, they have to admit that for once, when it counted, he finally got it right. You can bitch all you want. I think this year's choice for man of the year was clear. And well deserved.
posted by ZachsMind at 8:37 AM on December 23, 2001

oops. Correction: FDNY not FYND. My bad. Typo. Sorry.
posted by ZachsMind at 8:44 AM on December 23, 2001

Also, he was a lot more on the ball with the relief efforts than Mister Bush-lite.
posted by trioperative at 8:50 AM on December 23, 2001

It's a documented fact that Rudolph Giuliani's leadership helped spare the lives of anywhere between 27-47 thousand New Yorkers.

Tell me again how Giuliani did that. His leadership? WTC collapsed two hours after the planes struck, during that time you're telling me that Rudy's leadership saved min 27K lives? First of all the FYND [sic] and NYPD were trained to do what they did, Giuliani had nothing to do with it! The only thing he did do, I'll grant him that, is speak out (i.e. more press conferences, visiting FDNY stations etc.).
Personally I can't fathom the reason behind your opinion.
Where's the documentation? For future reference please back up your pov next time Zach.
posted by ( . )( . ) at 8:54 AM on December 23, 2001

Hey ZachsMind, I called it at 11:16 a.m. You called it at 11:38 a.m. I am 22 minutes superior to you. Bow down and kiss my ring.
posted by fleener at 8:55 AM on December 23, 2001

I'm more interested (er, I mean amused) that Bush did not get picked. His blow horn footage was the most scripted "unplanned, impromptu" camera moment yet. History will remember him only in the shadow of Rudy. I'm still waiting for the leadership.
posted by fleener at 8:58 AM on December 23, 2001

Comedy gold. Black gold.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:11 AM on December 23, 2001

Good for Rudy. Noone will any longer remember any of his actual "mayorness" anymore, his policies. No more glass of wine in NYC w/o concern that your car will be taken away from you at a checkpoint. Cops roaming the streets shooting unarmed immigrants w/o fear of being reprimanded, or even talked about by the mayor. And attempts to make NYC as sqeaky clean as branson (no more strip clubs (I'm against strib clubs by principle, but I have no issues with them existing for those that are willing to partake)). Now, Rudy can rest after the nw year knowing confidently that he will always remember as being a good PR man, not a bad mayor.
posted by Ufez Jones at 9:23 AM on December 23, 2001

wow, brain fart...need to read this more carefully.

Now, Rudy can rest after the new year knowing confidently that he will always be remembered as a good PR man, not a bad mayor.
posted by Ufez Jones at 9:25 AM on December 23, 2001

The idea that Rudy saved more people than bin Laden killed is a) hard to prove b) irrelevent for the time magazine person of the year.

Time Magazine says their Person of the Year must be awarded to "the person or thing that had the greatest impact on the news for good or ill". Impact, not potential impact.

It's hard to believe that anyone thinks bin Laden impacted the world/media less than Rudy.
posted by jragon at 9:25 AM on December 23, 2001

Well said jragon. I agree completely.
posted by ( . )( . ) at 9:30 AM on December 23, 2001

"Though we spent hours debating the pros and cons of naming Osama bin Laden, it ultimately became easy to dismiss him," said managing editor Jim Kelly. "He is not a larger-than-life figure with broad historical sweep ... he is smaller than life, a garden-variety terrorist whose evil plan succeeded beyond his highest hopes."

Sure it's a feel good choice, but that justification works for me. OBL himself said, assuming the translation of the infamous tape was valid, that the carnage and destruction that resulted was far more than he could have imagined.

Even though Giuliani's role was thrust into his lap by OBL, to me his actions on 9/11 and afterward made him just as newsworthy, if not more.
posted by digital_insomnia at 9:32 AM on December 23, 2001

jragon, hard for you to believe. Not for me.
posted by fleener at 9:33 AM on December 23, 2001

What about the mayor of Crystal City, VA (Pentagon) whats his name.

There is no mayor of Crystal City.

Crystal City is a section of <a href="http://sites.netscape.net/frnkcol/ARLINGTN.htm"Arlington, Virginia... and the has no mayor, but has a County Manager, who is probably no one you've ever heard of --Ron Carlee.

This should not be surprising. The damage and death at the Pentagon has been mostly a postscript in the whole story of the 9/11 carnage.
posted by crunchland at 9:35 AM on December 23, 2001

Hmmm, should Time have named Pitcher Osama, who almost threw a no-hitter, or Rudy, who smacked the ball out of the park?
posted by fleener at 9:38 AM on December 23, 2001

Yes, I understand what Time uses as criteria for choosing POTY, and I can see your arguments for OBL, but I say screw him. Don't make this asshole any bigger than he is. How many of the general public understand how they make this choice? Time is a business, and their job is to sell magazines. How many would sit unsold on newsstands, and how many subscriptions would be cancelled if they had picked OBL? They did what they had to do. Feel good? Sure. But I, for one, don't feel bad about feeling good about this.
posted by AstroGuy at 9:57 AM on December 23, 2001

We never hear about the terrorist attacks that are completely prevented, do we? Only the times when they succeed. How many bombs have been quietly confiscated by airport security? I don't think there's any documentation for the terrorism that gets prevented. We never acknowledge that enough.

Hey boobies ( . )( . ). The use of ( . )( . ) as a nomenclature on the Internet is moronic. I'm not calling you moronic, but your namechoice is, and since you've only posted less than a half dozen comments to MeFi since December 22, 2001, my guess is you're some other regular poster who just uses this moronic mask from which to hide behind and troll people.

Next time try reading the CNN article that this thread's linked to and the Times article before you go asking me for documentation. It's already in there. Or check out what actually happened that day direct from Giuliani's own mouth.

Before Giuliani, the previous mayors were so inept they had the police and fire departments practically competing with each other. Rudy got them talking and he keeps them on the same page in times of crisis. Nothing could prepare anyone for 911, but Giuliani did his best to insure his people were prepared for anything.

They only had two hours to vacate the two tallest buildings in the city. Tens of thousands of people. At last count, they estimate three thousand are dead. The original estimate was much greater than that. The actual number of people who were in harm's way that morning is easily ten times that - probably more. Giuliani did a kick ass job under the circumstances. Before Giuliani, New York wouldn't have been able to survive this. Thanks to his leadership, they had what it took to get the job done.

Giuliani's leadership saved lives. That is documented and provable. Rudy prevented the WTC attack from being worse than it could have been. If you look at this from a standpoint of prevention instead of a standpoint of effect, the choice of Man of the Year is clear.

If you have any more questions, Boobies, why not call New York and ask Rudy yourself? Or maybe read a newspaper once in awhile. And get a real name, troll.


And Fleener, I have absolutely no clue where your ring's been. =)
posted by ZachsMind at 9:57 AM on December 23, 2001

Even before 9/11 Giuliani was impressive.

First he had prostrate cancer issue, then he cheats on his wife with no attempt to hide the fact while his wife does the "Vagina Monologues".

The Catholic church sides with Giuliani regarding the adultery aspect because his prostrate cancer technically doesn't allow sex (Catholic sex is a very limited category).

And didn't he have the balls to openly move his lover into his home (pun unintended). (Not sure about this one).

Time Magazine picked a real winner. I'm looking forward to see what Giuliani does in the future.
posted by DBAPaul at 10:00 AM on December 23, 2001

(Catholic sex is a very limited category). And now you know ... the rest of the story.
posted by rschram at 10:17 AM on December 23, 2001

Before Giuliani, New York wouldn't have been able to survive this.

Yes, we're all a bunch of simpering morons. We would have probably all wondered into the East River and drowned without Rudy's leadership.

As for it being "documented and provable" that Rudy's actions saved lives, well, I'd love to see that proof. Giulliani was impressive on television. He was collected and informed and articulate, as opposed to the cretin in the Whitehouse. Those things were important following the attacks, but I didn't see him perform any ACTIONS that were spectacularly original, or really any different than what any mayor would have done.

We shouldn't confuse the office of Mayor and established emergency service protocol with Rudy Giulliani saving lives. All that being said, I was mildly proud to have Giulliani as mayor. In New York, even when we elect a horrible republican, he's STILL better than what the nation as a whole chose (Bush).
posted by Doug at 10:21 AM on December 23, 2001

My god! How readily folks swallow the Time marketing thing about Man of the Year and get all worked up about what is nothing more than an attempt to sell more copies of the magazine. Give me a swim suit edition every time.
Reminds me of People's Sexiest Man of the Year, which changes each year and does pretty much the same crap to sell more magazines.
I think the mayor's new girlfriend should be Bitch of the Year...so there.
posted by Postroad at 10:33 AM on December 23, 2001

Zach, your depiction of NY'ers is simply hilarious! Without Rudy, as you try to argue, there would have been more deaths. That's simply not the case. When it comes down to saving lives people tend to cooperate to the fullest, and the FDNY and NYPD are indeed trained for situations like this. Not specifically but theoretically.

As to my being a troll, well everyone is entitled to an opinion. I've been reading MeFi for awhile now just never took the time ro register.

As to my nomenclature being moronic but me being not, is a contradiction, as a person's actions define that person. Having said that if you do in fact still feel that I am moronic please in the future refrain from stating so as that only adds to things unpleasant.
posted by ( . )( . ) at 10:35 AM on December 23, 2001

if you do in fact still feel that I am moronic please in the future refrain from stating so as that only adds to things unpleasant.

so do sexist, immature screen names. It's like having one saying "iwannafuckyourmom" or something like that.
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:43 AM on December 23, 2001

Jones, if you are that immature please stop posting here.
posted by ( . )( . ) at 10:49 AM on December 23, 2001

Time's rationalizations are ridiculus. OBL met the criteria, Guliani did not. If Time doesn't want to make unpopular choices then they should remove the "or ill" from their criteria and try to be consistent.

(I predicted Guliani back in September! Miss Cleo ain't got nothin' on me!)
posted by homunculus at 11:01 AM on December 23, 2001

Jesus, chill out kids. It sucks that so many recent threads descend into sophomoric name-calling.

On the other hand (actually pertaining to the thread). I think it might be cool to think of TIME choosing Rudy over bin Laden as a giant "fuck you" to OBL and his people. Yeah, he had more impact than Rudy did, but he did so in part as a desperate attempt to draw attention to himself and his cause. Should we have given him more attention via "man of the year"? No - fuck him and his desires, and let's focus on what we want (the positive) - it's all subjective anyhow, no?
posted by kokogiak at 11:11 AM on December 23, 2001

Anybody want to guess who will win Time Magazine's "Copout of the Year"?
posted by Dirjy at 11:21 AM on December 23, 2001

My god! How readily folks swallow the Time marketing thing about Man of the Year and get all worked up about what is nothing more than an attempt to sell more copies of the magazine.

Exactly, the OBL rumors were just guerilla-type marketing that got people talking and now that they've chosen someone perceived as a hero its a great deed. (look at kokogiak's comment which ignore alumni like Hitler and Stalin).

There's a lot to be said if you can even pick a most noteworthy political person. What's Hitler without his party? Or as someone already mentioned OBL without al'queda. I don't see what specific things Giuliani did. This thread just helps prove my conviction that he was a personable and warm figurehead media-wise. He came off well on TV. Kudos to you, Lisa!

Its really just marketing. The newsworthy name world-wide on everyone's mind is OBL not Bush and certainly not Giuliani. Time's comment on not picking a 'small man' says it all.

Time doesn't want to make unpopular choices then they should remove the "or ill" from their criteria and try to be consistent.


Well put.
posted by skallas at 11:32 AM on December 23, 2001

If you would have told me a year ago that I would have supported Giuliani in any way, I would have laughed in your face. I have seen many changes in New York in the eight years I've lived here. The horror of the Louima case was the low point of what I used to consider a kind of Giuliani police state. See, used to be, I stepped over a sleeping crack addict every morning to go to work, people openly shot drugs on my stoop, and there were plenty of places I was afraid to go alone at night. Due to the drop in crime and the subsequent gentrification, I doubt that I will ever be able to afford an apartment in Manhattan again. The New Times Square? I hated it.

I can honestly say that I never understood the meaning of leadership and grace under pressure until I saw Giuliani in action on 9/11. He had a calming effect that no "national" politician -- Bush, Clinton or Gore -- could have come near. The emergency response of this city was unbelievable -- especially if you remember the fact that the command center was destroyed in the attacks. What he did that day and in the following days was much more than coming across well on television.

This was his moment of greatness. There is no question for me that he IS the Man of the Year.
posted by edamame at 1:53 PM on December 23, 2001

"Give me a swim suit edition every time."

Come on, who wants to see Hizzonner in a swim suit? It was hard enough seeing him as a Rockette.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 2:25 PM on December 23, 2001

"He is not a larger-than-life figure with broad historical sweep ... he is smaller than life, a garden-variety terrorist whose evil plan succeeded beyond his highest hopes."

Funny, that didn't stop them from choosing Saddam Hussein and the Ayatollah Khomeni.

Cowards, indeed.
posted by rushmc at 2:57 PM on December 23, 2001

Funny, that didn't stop them from choosing Saddam Hussein and the Ayatollah Khomeni.

Hmm, and how soon we forget Hitler & Stalin as well, both chosen during WWII.
posted by somethingotherthan at 4:00 PM on December 23, 2001

look at kokogiak's comment which ignore alumni like Hitler and Stalin

Skallas, I was not ignoring Hitler & Stalin, I just put them in a different league. Like I said, it is very subjective, despite Time's stated "rules". If it was to be purely objective, they ought to co-opt Google's year-end wrap-up.
posted by kokogiak at 4:14 PM on December 23, 2001

Perhaps the reason so many people, such as edamane, have found themselves unexpectedly admiring Guliani is this: during the crisis, more than any other politician he was personally involved, losing many people close to him and yet he still acted professionally and with class and dignity though we could see his pain. In effect, a lot of us especially in the NYC area saw ourselves in him.
Now, I've never been a diehard Rudy-lover or a diehard Rudy-basher, politically he's a mixed bag, but on 9/11 he certainly rose to the occasion.
On a separate note, some magazine(the name escapes me for the moment) runs an "image of the year" type of deal. I remember as I watched the towers collapse on TV, I saw a firefighter running from the rubble take of his helmet and throw it on the ground in frustration. That seemed to sum up my feelings of impotent rage on that day. If someone out there has a photo or vidcap of that image that would be my nominee.Also many of you have made the point that the victims, firefighters and police should get the nod as POTY. I say perhaps by proxy Guliani's getting it gives the award to the whole city.
posted by jonmc at 4:28 PM on December 23, 2001

There is of course yet another perspective to explore. Time does indeed do this to sell more magazines. No problem with that. Everybody's gotta make a buck.

In the past they have chosen controversial 'bad guys' like Hitler and people bitched about it then and they still do. Such controversial choices do sell zines. At least that was the case in the past.

However this year things have changed, and Time's editorial staff could sense it. OBL was the choice most people assumed they would make, based on their past decisions. Therefore had they chosen OBL it would have been old news before they could get the magazines on the newsstands, and therefore fewer zines would get purchased. Since they instead chose a more controversial figure for Person of the Year, they will no doubt sell more zines than had they chosen OBL.

Still I think the choice was well-made. Of course history will be the judge of that. JonMC is right in saying that by giving PotY to Guiliani, Time has effectively named New York, NY the City of the Year. We may have to wait another fifty years to see if the world will remember, or care. It is my hope that posterity will.
posted by ZachsMind at 5:53 PM on December 23, 2001

I'm of the opinion that Time's criteria is flawed. If the title was 'Most Newsworthy Person of the Year', I would understand. However, I think most people think of 'Person of the Year' as having a connotation that this person did something to further the good of society.

Using Time's criteria, ObL also won 'Father of the Year'.
posted by Trampas at 6:24 PM on December 23, 2001

In 1941 it was FDR who won. Unless I'm mistaken he was very much reacting to events that year
posted by vbfg at 9:17 PM on December 23, 2001

I agree with Trampas. I remember that one of the big issues was that the bin Laden followers would see him being labeled as Man of the Year -- indicating that a major US publication praises bin Laden's actions.

I would have thought that TIME would have the guts to pick bin Laden, change the title to "Newsmaker of the Year", and put an unflattering picture on the cover (a la Purple Face Gingrich), thus remaining true to their set criteria.
posted by nakedgremlin at 10:17 PM on December 23, 2001

Maybe OBL didn't last the whole year?
posted by sylloge at 1:04 AM on December 24, 2001

On the question of how many people were successfully evacuated from the towers, USA Today's exhaustive research found:

Nearly everyone who could get out did get out. The Port Authority had revised its evacuation plan for the buildings after a terrorist bomb exploded in a Trade Center garage in 1993.

The number of dead was overestimated. The actual death toll is about 2,800, including rescue workers and the 157 people on the two jets.

The buildings were half-empty when the jets struck. USA TODAY estimates 5,000 to 7,000 people were in each tower when the attack began. Earlier estimates ranged from 10,000 to 25,000 per tower.

These figures suggest that between 7,000 and 11,000 people were successfully evacuated.
posted by ferris at 5:54 AM on December 24, 2001

For a web community so collectively cynical about "mainstream news" and whatnot, y'all are getting awfully bent out of shape over this...
posted by Spirit_VW at 9:00 AM on December 24, 2001

I agree with Trampas post about changing the name.

Giuliani should be commended.He has been an example of everything Bush isn't, which Giuliani should be very proud of.

Meanwhile though, Giuliani doesn't mean much outside of New York.

I had no idea that Time magazine was so New York-centric.

Name a segment of the media that isn't "New York-centric".

Time blinked, they pussed out.
posted by BarneyFifesBullet at 12:45 PM on December 24, 2001

Eisuke Kagawa should be the man of the year. He should be the man of the year every year.
posted by fuq at 6:24 PM on December 24, 2001

Time ragazine is still published?

Guiliani? Give me a break...that spinster did his JOB- what he was paid to do...the heroes in the whole 9/11 tragedy are the police officers and firemen that actually risked their lives doing their jobs- F Giuliani...what a slap in the face...mainstream media puppets make it sound as if the emergency workers would have had no clue with out their "fearless" leader- pah-lease.

I have friends that left their comfortable lives and families in the lower mid-east region to go volunteer their EMT services in New York for weeks on end- they are outraged, to say the least, at this copy selling choice of MOY.

Just another reason to not trust or listen to mainstream media- the same media that smoothed over another adulterous hypocrit, Clinton, and tried to make him look holier than thou and me...

** vomitting **

Yeah, BarneyFifesBullet, all media is New York-centric...and they can have it for themselves...blech.

** more vomit **
posted by ayukna at 3:15 PM on December 25, 2001

wayward egos prevent me from enjoying the otherwise intelligent and rational dialogue on mefi as much as i should. please think and consider before you post :)

Time definitely took the safe path this year. But does it mean they were cowardly though? with great [media] power comes great responsibility...no corporation would like to be in the position where they are the cause, however tenuous, to another dark season of terrorist attacks... maybe Time should be awarded Media Outlet Conglomerate of 2001?

hehe.
posted by elphTeq at 4:59 PM on December 25, 2001

Time magazine would have done just as well to name "god" as Person of the Year. Every death from 9/11 on, whether American, Afghan or Taliban, has been dealt in "his" cause. Millions were killed last millenium "in the name of god", and now this millenium is shaping up to be a repeat. Person of the year, of the century, of multiple milleniums, it's just history repeating itself.
posted by mischief at 5:51 AM on December 26, 2001